Hi all, > ACTION: Antoine to come up with a revised Conceptual Mapping proposal based on the comments received [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/04-swd-minutes.html#action01] > [1] has the link to it. Beyond the core proposal (which is to move [1] to the SKOS reference, apart perhaps from the discussion sections) there are two sub-proposals. PROPOSAL 1: No statement is made here about subsumption links between subproperties of skos:mappingRelation (e.g. skos:exactMatch rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:broadMatch). This is left to a NEW ISSUE on Semantics of mapping relations. No other statement statement is made here about OWL-semantics of mapping links, such as e.g. the transitivity of skos:exactMatch, skos:broadMatch, skos:narrowMatch and the symmetry of skos:relatedMatch. These problems should be dealt with by a new ISSUE on Semantics of mapping relations, which should be resolved in accordance to ISSUE-44 BroaderNarrowerSemantics. Semantic conditions, inconsistent examples, entailment rules and syntactic constraints are also left to the resolution of a new ISSUE on Semantics of mapping relations. PROPOSAL 2: a NEW ISSUE is raised on mapping links between conceptual entities that are not of type skos:Concept Cheers, Antoine [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Dec/0046.htmlReceived on Monday, 10 December 2007 18:38:55 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:32 GMT